On 28/11/2007, David Gerard <dgerard(a)gmail.com> wrote:
It's the way things have run for a while now. Your
use of "power grab"
doesn't make sense here - the ArbCom is a scaling of Jimbo, who used
to deal with difficult cases all on his own.
Not really. Historically I doubt someone refusing to explain their
actions to anyone below Jimbo would have got very far. Admins were
expected to explain their actions to the community if anyone cared
enough to ask. Stating that it is acceptable for someone to refuse to
justify themselves to anyone other than arbcom is a power grap since
it neatly removes the reviewing role from the community. Of course
such systems are fairly popular in meatspace although I doubt that
arbcom would be prepared to accept the normal requirements in the
western world for hearing evidence in secret.
--
geni